ArticleMalaria journal2025
Co-design of a routine clinical review to improve the safety of high dose radical cure treatment for Plasmodium vivax malaria: findings from Cambodia and Ethiopia.
Article in Malaria journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Analysis of the effect of primaquine dose on efficacy, safety, and tolerability in patients with Plasmodium vivax malaria in Ethiopia: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.Malaria journal · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness and safety of 7-day high-dose primaquine and single-dose tafenoquine versus 14-day low-dose primaquine in patients with Plasmodium vivax malaria (EFFORT): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, superiority trial.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2026Trial
- Moving towards high-dose primaquine or single-dose tafenoquine for Plasmodium vivax treatment in Cambodia: a meeting report from dissemination of results of the EFFORT trial to stakeholders.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of tafenoquine and primaquine for radical cure of Plasmodium vivax: a meeting report from dissemination of results of the EFFORT trial to stakeholders in Pakistan.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- Perceptions of shorter radical cure Plasmodium vivax treatment regimens and their implementation: a qualitative study among stakeholders in Cambodia.Malaria journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLow dose primaquine regimens are widely used to treat Plasmodium vivax malaria, but they have limited efficacy and effectiveness. Short courses with higher daily doses as well as single dose tafenoquine have the potential to improve effectiveness but can increase the risk of adverse events. A clinical review visit on day 3 post-treatment initiation could facilitate adherence and improve safety, but it is unclear how it could be integrated into routine malaria care.
methodsBetween March and September 2023, focus group discussions (FGDs) with P. vivax malaria patients and healthcare providers were conducted in Cambodia and Ethiopia. In the FGDs participants co-designed a day 3 review suitable for their setting based on material infrastructure 'building blocks' (location, implementer, procedures, and support mechanisms). Nine FGDs were completed in three health facility catchment areas in Cambodia and six FGDs in four facilities in Ethiopia. Data were analysed using an inductive-deductive analytical process allowing the development of themes.
resultsParticipants in Cambodia and Ethiopia had different preferences for the material infrastructure of the day 3 review, from which a model for each country was developed. In Cambodia, proximity to patients was prioritized, maintaining the existing referral mechanism in which the initial day 3 review is conducted in the community, focusing on an enhanced symptom assessment. In Ethiopia, continuity of care was prioritized, resulting in the day 3 review occurring at the location of initial diagnosis, with a tiered approach to procedures conducted during the visit. In addition, the dynamics and relationships between people (relational infrastructure), specifically collaboration, were identified as key facilitators for the review's implementation in both study countries. Collaboration across levels of the health system and among healthcare providers was found to be a process influenced and necessitated by the environment (e.g., the infrastructural and epidemiological contexts), contributing to quality of care, continuity of care, safety, and effective treatment.
conclusionIdentifying how clinical review visits could be adapted to local settings is important and can be achieved through co-creation. Collaboration has the potential to enable quality of care and patient safety. Suitable ways of reinforcing this relational infrastructure are required to optimize case management of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.